BOOTING OUT LAZY WORKERS COULD CREATE SPACE FOR KEEN BEANS
A new report commissioned by the Prime Minister has suggested that it should be made easier for employers to fire unproductive or lazy workers — and replace them with hard workers who are keen to get ahead, including graduates desperate for work.
British workers should be banned from claiming unfair dismissal so that firms and public sector bodies can find more capable replacements, the report says. Under current regulations, unproductive workers are allowed to “coast along” and employers are left fearful of expanding because new staff may prove “unknown quantities” who are impossible to sack.
A final draft of the Beecroft report, dated Oct 12 2011, says the first major issue for British enterprise is “the terrible impact of the current unfair dismissal rules on the efficiency and hence competitiveness of our businesses, and on the effectiveness and cost of our public services.”
Workers’ unions have reacted with alarm to the idea of allowing employers to fire unproductive workers without giving a reason. The expressed concern that older workers could be targeted — and that employers could fire workers simply because they don’t like them.
But supporters of the plan say giving bosses greater freedom to get rid of unproductive workers could be good news for those who are keen to work — including job-hunting graduates.
*Should those with jobs have to work harder to keep them?
Should bosses have the right to fire staff who are slacking off — freeing up space and money for young graduates desperate for work? Or would the new legislation give employers too much power? Would this new legislation boost the economy — or just increase the number of unemployed?
I think you need to say “unproductive workers”, since this is an opinion expressed by said employers. “Unwanted”, “too vocal”, “too old”, “too foreign”, “unwilling to work unlimited unpaid hours” are other alternatives.
A previous employer of mine permitted bullying of several members of staff by managers. The employer would have enjoyed having the option of simply firing those who complained (including some of us who weren’t even targets of the bully).
Couple this with the new £1000 charge for an employment tribunal and it’s easy to see wages will fall even farther. Employees will fear making any attempt to improve their situation.
Disabled workers are likely to be first against the wall under this, closely followed by any female worker who decides she wants a family, those who won’t back down to management bullying, those who don’t fit it, and so on. Management are already adept at trying to use claims of laziness or inability to cover the real reason they want someone out of a job, this is just the ConDems gutting the protection of the average worker to suit the reactionary diktats of the Institute of Directors (who made similar proposals last year).
“and that employers could fire workers simply because they don’t like them.”
– this is a VERY real concern. Trade unions are right to voice their concerns, and blogs such as this should listen.
British workers are already the easiest to fire in Europe so this is just the usual right wing tactic of creating a problem and then using it to attack a piece of legislation that protects workers.
I also fail to see how making it even easier to fire workers helps anyone. If you were to get the job of someone who had just been fired you’d be subject to the same repressive and fearful working environment. You’re probably thinking that what happened to them won’t happen to you but guess what, that’s what the person you’re replacing thought.
In most cases where an employee isn’t performing as they should be there’s usually a more fundamental explanation than lazyness. More often than not they just need a little more training or other support from their employer. In other cases a decline in performance can be caused by ill health or other personal problems away from work that sacking them will only make worse.
So if you’re a normal human being who has bad days as well as good, occasionally gets sick or from time to time has to deal with life beyond the workplace and may not be 100% focussed on the job 100% of the time I’d be wary about welcoming such a move.
Employers have far too much powers as it is today. There should already be procedures within the company to deal with those underperforming. I think we’ve worked far too hard to get where we are today with regards to employment law. Something like this would just put added pressure on all current workers, especially young people who have just entered the workplace and are already going above and beyond to keep their jobs and impress their employees. It’s not surprising seeing the Tories come up with another policy to affect those that are in a vulnerable position! Shocking! They need to try again and come up with a more viable, fair and long term solution as telling all graduates to go set up a business, is also another crap idea!
All things being equal, were such a law come into effect, the likelihood is that incompetent business managers (Parkinsons Law suggests that, within any single organisation, at least one person will be promoted on the basis of their incompetence) would be first in the queue to be dispensed with if they weren’t sidelined to start with.
If Graduates are sacked/hired as mere interns, supported by the Bank of Mam and Dad or as unemployed, they will be joining organisations which will effectively die through lack of Managerial Competence amongst Business Managers, rather than through the recruitment process.
It would be a disturbing development. Too many jobs are already insecure. I wouldn’t want the situation to get any worse. More rights to workers; not less
It’s a diversionary tactic …
The PM knows he and his Chancellor haven’t a clue how to bring back growth or stop unemployment rising. He knows the economic news will get even worse.
How can he stop the voters and press calling for his hide? Best way out is to float another daft idea and get them talking about that.
This is just an excuse to strip away more protections. Obviously some people are falsely claiming unfair dismissal – often hoping for an out-of-court settlement to shut them up – but unfair dismissal does happen, and the answer isn’t to hand employers even more cards than they already have in the present climate.
They can already fire anyone for almost any reason within the first year of employment, and many employed young people (possibly most) are trapped in unstable temp employment/short-term contracts (I’m lucky to have a full-time data-entry job at uni, but it may only last til Xmas). And as Channel 4 pointed out, Britain already has the most liberal employment regulations in Western Europe.
This law would just make things even more unstable (or “flexible”).
What happens to disabled people, especially disabled people who do not declare their disabilities ?
If you don’t declare, you have no legal protection until you do. We all know discrimination against disability is so widespread that not declaring may be the only way forward, but it definitely increases the risks you face. I don’t have the option of not declaring, using crutches is pretty visible, but attitudes to my invisible disability are by far the more damaging and I can understand why people don’t.
That’s a downright evil idea which is typical of the vermin that populate Conservative Central Office these days.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-24007941-clegg-moves-to-block-fire-at-will-jobs-reform.do
Do you think Nick Clegg really does “get it” (re: unpaid internships)? True blue, through and through.